There are so many dedicated application for stitching images together some free and others with modest cost. Improving photomerge to compete with those would be a very costly undertaking and would not improve Adobe bottom line.  The bottom line seams to be what Adobe is all about these days

There more to it than just overlap . Exposure setting focal length and how well the lens is rotated about its nodel point play a big roll.  Programs like PS Photomerge and Microsoft ICE can not even handle image taken with fisheye lens. A Fisheye lens is ideal for stitching spherical panoramas for you only need five images. You need a program like AutoPano Pro to do stitching well. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/5987164

IMO Adobe should not let anything take precedence over bug fixing and bug fixing should be made a high priority however I don't think we will see that happening in my lifetime.

And then there are results like these:

First PTAssempler stitch

View it with a  pano viewer http://www.mouseprints.net/old/BigBen/PTViewer.html

Second Photomerge results

Did you check »Blend Images Together« in the Photomerge dialog?

Noel I fully agree.  There is no good reason for Adobe to want to compete with stitching applications.  Photomergs works quit well when image are taken with normal lenses with stitching in mind. Where all images are exposed with same manual settings with good overlap and shot from the same point.

It would require a lot of work or a buyout to compete. Ether way it would cost Adobe a lot and not improve their bottom line. There is not that much of a marker for spherical panoramas.

Adam also generalizes, "no one can properly use the new oil painting filter".  I haven't seen problems with that either.

I wonder how many people go through life thinking stuff just "doesn't work" when the stuff just requires a bit more care or finesse to use, and maybe a better cared-for computer system...

-Noel

"It's buggy until I understand it."  :+)

Adam,

an actual test, using CS2:

Nikon D5100

f=55mm

5 Images, automatically merged, total size (19464 x 3796) pixels.

Levels

Downsampled (1300 x 254) pixels

Smart Sharpen

JPEG

For wide angle shots without lens correction and /or queer perspective

situations it's necessary to prepare the automatic stitching by  manual

adjustments and the result will not be as convincing.

Resumed: there may be better programs, but PhS - even my old CS2 -

works in certain limits reasonably.

Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

Message was edited again.

AdamDux wrote:

 

Please take a series of 6 or 7 HD photos (3264x2448 for example) and let me know how it turns out.  As mentioned, the free mobile apps can create a panorama in seconds and it's seamless.

 

I'm not interested in 72dpi 800x600 goofy images.

OK here is a Photomerge of 12 5MP portrait orientated images that is 360 from the top of the mount no sharpening no touch up or cropping. Please post an Image from your Android and iPhone the show something it this range 17256Px by 2689 Px some where like 57" x 9" at 300 dpi 6MB. Needs to be a link open in a new window or tab.  Looking forward to seeing what your phones can do have you posted any full size example Please post one taken in portrait orientation for better panorama height.

http://www.mouseprints.net/old/dpr/Photomerg_Panorama.jpg

Here are 6 image processed with better software and some cover ups because boats were rocking.

http://www.mouseprints.net/old/dpr/Mariner.jpg

Please take a series of 6 or 7 HD photos (3264x2448 for example) and let me know how it turns out.

Seems to work fine; the source images are 4000px by 3000px and the result is over 19000px wide, but that would still need some clipping.

In any case I used »Auto« for Layout and »Blend Images Together« was checked.

AdamDux wrote:

 

c.pfaffenbichler:    

Please take a series of 6 or 7 HD photos (3264x2448 for example) and let me know how it turns out.  As mentioned, the free mobile apps can create a panorama in seconds and it's seamless.

 

I'm not interested in 72dpi 800x600 goofy images.

 

Noel:  Do the same.

"HD photos (3264x2448 for example)"?  My images are 6144 x 4096 pixels at 16 bits/channel, Adam. I don't work with little stuff.

The wider panorama I showed above was from nine such images.  Here's the result just after Photomerge completed, done with Cylindrical and Auto settings.  Note the pixel dimensions listed for the stitching result.

Here are another couple of examples, including one that contains a lot of water, which is traditionally difficult for stitching software.

-

Something's specifically wrong on your end if you're not getting good blending.  Photoshop is clearly capable.  Either you have a resource shortage or you're not using the right settings, or maybe your vignetting is so egregious it can't compensate (which you can fix by using appropriate settings in Camera Raw).

As far as I can see it's not important whether you have too much overlap.

Do you have literally hundreds of GB free on your scratch drive?  Photomerge has been known to use that much.  It used 91GB doing the above.

I don't disagree with you that Photoshop should put up an appropriate error message if it aborts or degrades its operation because it runs short of resources.

-Noel

"high resolution Phone Panorama images"

<snirk>